Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. YETI scored 66.3, YUMC scored 77.1 — YUMC leads.
Compare another set
YETI
YETI Holdings, Inc.
Leisure · Quality-Growth
66.3
$39.79 · $2.9B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
10.8
YUMC leads
YUMC
Yum China Holdings, Inc.
Restaurants · Quality-Growth
77.1
$42.92 · $14.5B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestYUMC15.3x
Fastest growthYUMC+8.8%
Strongest balance sheetYUMC0.38
Highest qualityYETI90 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueYUMC-7%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
YETI
stronger →← stronger
YUMC
90
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
85
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
73
65
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
74
YUMC is stronger on 2 of 3 pillars.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
YETI
YUMC
$257mC
FCF
$940mC+
+6.2%C+
Rev
+8.8%B
0.42B+
D/E
0.38A-
17.4xB
P/E
15.3xB+
1.27B
PEG
0.93B+
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
YETI
YUMC
1% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
7% below
~8%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~5%/yr
-8%
1-yr DCF upside
+1%
+1%
5-yr DCF upside
+8%
+14%
10-yr DCF upside
+18%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
YETI
Why this score
Buying back stock
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
YUMC
Why this score
Buying back stock
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
The companies
YETIYETI Holdings, Inc.
Leisure · $39.79 · beta 1.68
Why now
Leisure · market cap $2.9b. Down 26% from 52-week high of $53.99 — deep drawdown territory. 15 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $54.93 (implying +38% upside).
Moat
ROE 29% — top-decile capital efficiency. Either pricing leverage, low capital intensity, or aggressive buybacks; the durability story depends on which. FCF converts 144% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Beta 1.68 implies above-market volatility — position-size to the drawdowns this name will produce in a market correction, not to its bull-case return.
YUMCYum China Holdings, Inc.
Restaurants · $42.92 · beta 0.06
Why now
Restaurants · market cap $14.5b. Down 26% from 52-week high of $58.39 — deep drawdown territory. PEG 0.93 — paying under fair value for the growth rate. 20 sell-side analysts rate this a Strong Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $61.91 (implying +44% upside).
Moat
ROE 18% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 96% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Value re-rating depends on a catalyst. Without one — analyst day, divestiture, margin recovery, capital return — the stock can stay cheap on these multiples for years.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
YUMC leads YETI by 8.7 points (76.7 to 68.0), its sharpest advantage coming in Rev (grade B). All screen as growth-type names but sit in different sectors (Leisure versus Restaurants), so their grades are relative to different peer sets.
Our AI analyst is busy right now, so this verdict is drawn directly from the pillars, grades and DCF above.
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where YETI and YUMC diverge
On the headline score the gap is 10.8 points in favor of YUMC. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
GrowthYETI 50.0 · YUMC 73.0YUMC +23.0
ValueYETI 64.7 · YUMC 74.0YUMC +9.3
QualityYETI 90.3 · YUMC 84.8YETI +5.5
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is YUMC or YETI the better stock?
YUMC scores higher: YUMC 77.1, YETI 66.3 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do YUMC and YETI differ most?
The widest gap is growth, where YUMC leads by 23 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are YUMC and YETI scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.